Case 2400410/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B Parkyn v Shane Evans — 2025
- Case reference
- 2400410/2024
- Decision date
- 9 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tobin Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr B Parkyn
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal proceeded under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 because the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. On that basis, Employment Judge Tobin determined the claim on the papers.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages. It ordered the respondent, Shane Evans, to pay Mr B Parkyn the net sum of £8,139.42.
The tribunal also dealt with a claim for accrued but untaken holiday entitlement, but made no award on that issue because the claimant had failed to quantify the claim. The written judgment was sent to the parties on 8 January 2025.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of the net sum of £8,139.42. | Upheld | — | £8,139 |
| Holiday pay | No award was made in respect of accrued but untaken holiday entitlement because the claimant failed to quantify that claim. | Other | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £8,139
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21, Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.